Menu

Exploring the ‘darker mechanisms of reality’: prologue to new 9/11 book hits home

By Craig McKee

There is a reason why so many conspiracy “enthusiasts” connect with the concept behind The Matrix.

It shows us a world that most accept as being real. People have jobs, have friends, have lives, and they don’t ask questions. But Thomas Anderson/Neo has a different future ahead of him. We follow him as he takes the red pill, and we all find out “just how deep the rabbit hole goes.”

I’m currently reading a provocative new book that looks at 9/11 from a vantage point in the deepest recesses of the rabbit hole. The book is called The Most Dangerous Book in the World: 9/11 as Mass Ritual by S.K. Bain. I’ve got an interview lined up with the author as soon as I have finished; reading the book.

But in the meantime, I was particularly struck by the prologue of the book, entitled “Knock, knock” and written by Peter Levenda, author of Sinister Forces. Levenda offers more than just an introduction to Bain’s book, which contends that 9/11 was an elaborate occult ritual, he offers an insightful description of what it means to be a “conspiracy theorist” and what it means to be, well, everybody else.

With Bain’s kind permission, I am reproducing a major chunk of Levenda’s prologue below, leaving out the parts that deal directly with the book he is introducing (we’ll get to that in the interview piece). Levenda looks at how the majority of us live in a reality that has been constructed for us while those who are fascinated by secrets and conspiracies are determined to look at and understand the “darker mechanisms of reality.”

I am very conscious of the transition process from a state of accepting the surface reality we’re presented with to one of wanting to understand – and expose – the hidden and insidious manipulations of our world for the benefit of a few. Although I’ve always felt unsatisfied with the reality presented to us (I began obsessing about the Kennedy assassination in my early teens), that feeling has been brought to a new level since I got involved in the 9/11 Truth movement. Frankly, some of my long-time friends think I’ve gone off the deep end, seeing conspiracies everywhere. I, on the other hand, am increasingly frustrated at their resistance and denial of what I am now just starting to see.

As with Neo, there’s no going back for me. Once you’ve become a pickle, you can’t go back to being a cucumber. Perhaps, Mr. Levenda can put it better as he looks at what it means to be a conspiracy theorist:

“They have one foot in the world of mainstream history and culture, what Robert Anton Wilson used to call “consensus reality.” That’s the world where most of us live. We are all products of that world, and of the ideas and worldview it represents. We are trained in this world virtually from birth: school, church, government, media all conspire to present an image—a picture—of reality that will result in the development of perfect citizens in an easily-managed society. There is a social contract: we contribute to this society with the expectation that we will receive goods and services in return. We obey the laws that are created by other people, believing that our best interests are being addressed thereby. We fight in wars declared by our governments in order to preserve our society: this carefully-structured, albeit artificial, society.

And all is right with the world.

But conspiracy theorists have their other foot … well, somewhere else. Not everyone is asleep to the darker mechanisms of reality. In fact, everyone becomes aware of them at some point in their lives. Everyone questions. The very nature of reality itself is at times so hostile to human life that human institutions must be challenged for their inadequate protection of their constituents. Conspiracy theorists seize on this inadequacy as evidence of the tenuousness of consensus reality. There are other forces at work, forces that are unacknowledged by the state, the church, the media because to admit their existence is to admit failure. Thus, when things go wrong, terrorists are blamed, or communists, or witches. This serves to rally the citizens around the government once again, instead of stopping to insist that explanations be given, that evidence is properly analyzed, that the guilty are apprehended and punished. And we once more go to war, against … someone, somewhere.

Paranoia becomes institutionalized. It is appropriated by the government as its own prerogative. The state determines the nature and quality of the paranoia: it creates intelligence agencies whose sole purpose is to give a form to paranoia, to enshrine paranoia as one of the necessary qualities of an observant and caring state. To prove that paranoia is an acceptable characteristic of the paternalistic regime.

The citizens are not allowed to become paranoid unless it is at government direction and sanction. Individual cases of paranoia are frowned upon. The state tells us that if we are not paranoid the way it is paranoid—and about the same things—it’s because we don’t have all the facts: about terrorism, fundamentalism, communism, foreign countries, weapons of mass destruction, sleeper cells. The state has all the facts: classified documents, wire-tap transcripts, intelligence feeds, high-altitude reconnaissance images, none of which the citizen is permitted to see.

It does not realize that the logical conclusion of all this paranoia is suspicion of the state apparatus itself.

What the conspiracy theorist often fails to realize, however, is that those working for the state are often just as clueless as the average citizen when it comes to the origin and function of the forces at work to subvert it. The strength of a conspiracy, after all, rests in the limited number of persons who are aware of its existence and parameters. No one has the entire picture. Each member of the state apparatus only has possession of a single piece of an enormous jigsaw puzzle. Putting together all these disparate pieces—particularly when one does not have the original picture to work from—is a soul-destroying enterprise that consumes decades of work and years of one’s life. This is especially true when the state has in its arsenal of lies the techniques of disinformation and misdirection, of false testimony and planted documents.

Anyone who works with this material eventually comes to that realization. But the motivation to keep digging is still alive; the urge to uncover one more piece of the puzzle, one more document, is perhaps a central characteristic not only of the conspiracy theorist but of human nature itself. The more intelligent of the theorists soon come to realize that Hansel and Gretel have left breadcrumbs everywhere, in no discernible pattern. Thus, the inclination among some of the best to stop looking for the children and start looking for the Witch.

The deeper one delves into the conspiracy literature, the more one is struck by the tendency of some theorists to look beyond the documents and the tangible evidence of government malfeasance or political conspiracy to more transcendental sources of power. One begins with the government agents, the spies, the politicians, the military, and soon gravitates towards the secret societies: the Freemasons and the Illuminati (among so many others). This involves studying their texts, their social structures, their stated goals, their secret conclaves, their antinomian beliefs and practices.”

And that’s where Bain’s book comes in – a rabbit hole exploration for another day.

I have also read Bain’s “9/11 as Mass Ritual.” It is very interesting, for it provides a new insight in the 9/11 numerology and the 9/11 symbology. However, its contents belie the “most dangerous” label.

Reading a little further than the prologue, the introduction offers a terribly biased view of the existing 9/11 knowledge, failing to even mention the scientifically established truth of the twin towers’ criminal controlled demolition and how straightforwardly the video evidence leads to it.

The rest of the book is hardly more convincing, appealing to emotion more than to reason. For instance, it badly misses an exhaustive table (or reference to a table) of “occult” symbols, their meaning, which ones have a match in 9/11, and how good their matches are.

Bain claims, with reason, that his study demonstrates the 9/11 conspiracy to encompass much more than the events of 9/11 themselves and their U.S. cover-up. But the failure of countless watchdogs to denounce 9/11’s essence (http://www.911censorship.com/twin%20towers'%20censorship.htm) proves the same thing much more easily and much more convincingly, and directly leads to the demonstration of the global Platonic theater conspiracy.

Bain’s book is hardly useful as a resource to reach out on 9/11, except to the few purist Christians who lose their mind at the slightest mention of Satan or Lucifer — no offense meant. Assuming it would get traction within the general public, the Master 9/11 conspirators, who hold sway over all principal liberal/socialist/union/green/Muslim/”enemy”/individual rights/peace/terrorist/academic/media leaders, will easily ridicule it.

Truly useful is the long addendum with the fictional scenario of a numerology-rich nuclear false flag in Phoenix this upcoming Christmas morning. Discerning readers shall warn the competent authorities (like well-known sheriff Arpaio) of the risk, so as to cancel the false flag assuming it would indeed have been planned. Alas, this call is not even written in the book.

On the plus side, when humanity has passed this 9/11 hump and universities start to set up conspiracy faculties, “9/11 as Mass Ritual” will be studied with interest.

Excellent Craig, makes me want to read the book. I have thought for a while that there is something behind 9/11 that I haven’t grasped yet – well there are many things – but the ritual nature of it is thought-provoking.

The whole purpose of the matrix according to the film is to prevent “whole crops” of human batteries from being lost. The problem the machines have is that they need the power generated from all the humans in the pods but if the humans break free of the matrix and realize they are nothing more than “copper top” batteries they will not stay put in the pods. The end result if all the humans left the pods is the machines would sputter and stop, they would die.

A closer analogy to our actual situation as human beings alive here and now would be difficult to find. Most of us are essentially slaves (all be it unwittingly) to a great machine, we go to work and bust our butts to make a living and pay our bills etc. What we do not realize though is that virtually everything we do in one way or another serves the machine which in turn demands more and more from us. Taxes go up, never down, prices go up, never down etc. The machine takes it all in the end, it takes EVERYTHING.

Think about how much power you are providing to the machine right now. Your wages are heavily taxed, which feeds the machine. Anthing you buy with what is left is taxed, heck even the person who sells you the stuff you buy gets taxed which of course feeds the machine. If you somehow save some money that too is taxed via interest income tax and it is taxed through the back door via inflation which renders your saved money less valuable each day. All of that too goes to feed the machine. You pay taxes to fund the police who drive around handing out more taxes for you to pay in the form of traffic tickets.

So who in our reality is neo? Who has shown us the way to break free of the matrix and finally be free, actualized people? Who has shown us how to stop the machine from working by depriving it of power? Gandhi has.

To break free of the matrix in our reality all a person has to do is stop giving the system what it wants and what it needs to survive which is your cooperation.

The page you linked to provides a lot of information but very little reference to where the information came from. Before I toss Gandhi under the bus I would like to see some substantiation for the claims made on that page. In short Emma, anybody can say anything about anyone but without evidence to back it up why should anyone listen?

For example I can say the following about the author of that piece you directed me to.

Timothy Watson was born into an elite family directly related to the Warburgs through his mother Emily. Emily Warburg was the daughter and favorite of Paul Moritz Warburg and sister to James Paul who is infamously quoted as saying:

“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it.
The only question is whether World Government will be achieved
by conquest or consent.”

Emily married into another elitist family when she was matched with William Watson who was a close friend to James Paul Warburg and even shared leadership of the east coast chapter of the OTO. Many occult scholars now attribute the east coast OTO with secret control and leadership over numerous other organizations such as Skull and Bones which controlled both sides of the Bush/Kerry presidential race.

It is now established that Emily went on to control the OTO worldwide and has now passed on that conrol to her son Timothy Watson. Since taking control of the OTO Timothy has worked hard to discredit and marginalize any and all historical and living figures who pose a threat to the OTO’s complete hegemonic power structure. Timothy is also closely connected to the illuminati families of Europe and many scholars such as Reinhart Gelb regard the OTO which he controls as the head of the illuminati world wide.

Now Emma perhaps it is you who has failed to think twice about Timothy huh?

P.S. I just made up every word I just said about Timothy Watson for the record.

So true, however, if you do not cooperate, its ok, they have camps for you to then do slave labor with no salary, no future, no income, until you agree to buy into the system as constructed, and then you will appreciate what small measure of freedom you had before being “camped”. Ask the Katrina victims; they are still in those camps 8 years later. They lost their properties because they could not get out of the camps to save them.

The entire construct of the paradigm of this postmodern society is based on the ELECTRONIC MEDIA VOODOO RITUAL. In a technocratic system a culture is simply the scum grown in a petri dish.

I would advise caution in taking this approach literally; that is “believing in” the analogies rather than recognizing that they are analogies, simple frames meant to lend bearings to ones quest for understanding.

I have studied the ILLUMINATI and the “dark” symbolism for decades. What is essential to grasp is that although the ‘controllers’ may believe in these dark arts, it doesn’t mean that they are true. The maniac with the hatchet who believes that “God told him” to cut you into tiny pieces, may corner you and murder you – this does not mean that “God” is speaking to him – it just means he is crazy as a shithouse rat. The same is true of the larger power structure that is running the planet.

I have been writing on these topics for quite some time…I won’t present a commercial for any of those essays here because I don’t believe it is the proper venue for such. But this topic is huge, has many caveats and nuances that must be addressed.

LOL I love that insight and wholly agree with it! I recently watched a video at Youtube called Nazis – The Occult Conspiracy – Complete http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYug7hTvI-s IT’s all here, it’s all here. The insanity, Silly men with power believing nonsense and wreaking havoc on millions of people. They also secretly employed various occult ‘magick’ in their efforts for world-domination—based it says here on Nordic myth of occultism. Part of their belief was imagining there actually existed the ‘Holy Grail’ that was to be found hidden in caves in France and which contained ‘pure Aryan blood’. This is fukin dumb-arsed literalism. From my own research, the grail is really referring to a psychedelic mushroom, and thanks to the scholarly research of authors like J.M.Allegro who revealed to me that not only for many of us, but anciently psychedelic vegetation was venerated and is the focus of many mythologies. WISELY taken these psychedelics can help us see right through the matrix BS, and this is a big BOG reason for the irrational fear of them being freely accessible to their ‘slaves’, us, and have a war against them, which is also of course therefore a war against consciousness.
I have also found this strange reality. I consider myself deeply interested in psychedelic research, and also–since 9/11–becoming more and more aware of this occult cabal at the rotting centre of this civilization with its symbolism and numbers etc ‘hidden in plain sight’. But when I have tried to engage well-known psychedelic researchers (and even their followers) into a debate about it, I am met with utter silence which I see as taboo!
This is a wrong move, because I feel authentic psychedelic awareness as to take this very serious reality into account.

That’s an interesting take on the grail – I had not been exposed to that interpretation before. Have you ever heard of a book called Supernatural by Graham Hancock? I am a great admirer of his work on the pyramids, sphinx and other ancient archeological sites. But in this book he talks about the uses made of hallucinogenic drugs for the purposes of enlightenment.

Yes I have that book next to where I sit at home. I LOVE the cover. I very much admire Graham Hancock for his speaking out against the war on consciousness. However, I cannot get any response from hi m or his FB followers regarding the Occultism that is hidden about. I very recently emailed Dennis McKenna about this and just got a reply where he says that maybe it is because the nature of psychedelic research is itself so controversial that people who are well-known researchers do not want to get involved with this hot potato! But I wish they would, because it is really important to help expose, and is very much part of the war on consciousness isn’t it?

The television is an ALTAR, the GOLDEN CALF.
None who attend it’s mass go unaffected.

“It {television} affects the psychology of people who watch. It increases the passivity of people who watch. It changes family relationships. It changes understandings of nature. It flattens perception so that information, which you need a fair amount of complexity to understand it as you would get from reading, this information is flattened down to a very reduced form on television. And the medium has inherent qualities which cause it to be that way.”~ Mander

Media psychology draws from multiples disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, neuroscience, political science, rhetorics, computer science, communications, and international relations.

The maimstream acadamiacs are the “Media Psychologists” who supply the theory for the technocratic public relations regime. The two in combination are the forefront of Social Engineering.
. . . . . . . . . . .

How TV Effects Brainwaves

“Formal Features” are the camera cuts, pans, zooms, etc. used very frequently in TV and movies. Because these “formal features” are so novel, and different from normal everyday reality, they trigger the brain’s “orienting response”. The “orienting response” is an important brain reflex that alerts us when there is a change in the environment. This “orienting response” is an essential survival mechanism because it forces us to pay attention to any (potentially dangerous) changes in the environment. Because of the involuntary nature of the “orienting response”, another name for it is “involuntary attention”.

It turns out that the “orienting response” has a particular brainwave effect. Namely, when the “orienting response” is triggered, the alpha brainwaves decrease. This decrease in alpha waves has the effect of making the brain more alert. Once the brain ascertains that whatever triggered the “orienting response” is not a threat, the Alpha brainwaves quickly return to their previous level.

Also, during the “orienting response” (“involuntary attention”) the Gamma brainwaves disappear. This decrease in Gamma waves has the effect of breaking the person’s focus. Unlike the Alpha brainwaves, the Gamma brainwaves have a harder time returning to their previous levels. If the “orienting response” is triggered too often (as with TV watching) the brain stays unfocused.
SEE:http://www.tvsmarter.com/documents/brainwaves.html

I am real sorry I am a bit late for this thread, and many of you may not be around, but anyway….That is interesting what you say. I have been very aware over the years how the editing of films etc has increased dramatically. Long gone now from films are longeurs which inspire a meditative reflective response on the viewer. Now it is like a gross ride through a theme park.
One thing that great GREATLY annoys me and I see as an assault on art and the senses is advert breaks. Again, I have seen these increase dramatically also, and it doesn’t matter what you watch–even very serious stuff which is sensitive, there is no sensitivity from the people who push the ad breaks and what it does is utterly fragment your sense of flow. it reminds me of what I have heard from John Taylor Gatto. How ‘education’ is designed to totally compartmentalize the sense of being—so you can be into some activity and then suddenly a bell goes and you have to immediately stop and go onto the next shit. It is brutal to the psyche

I also believe the television and films are used to used to condition us to accept certain realities that are on their way. Just watch any film that’s about terrorism, for example. The almost all take as a given that the “terrorist threat” is the single largest obstacle to peace. We know better.

Craig McKee said: “I am very conscious of the transition process from a state of accepting the surface reality we’re presented with to one of wanting to understand – and expose – the hidden and insidious manipulations of our world for the benefit of a few….”

“…only one of the two photos that head this article is a fake, while the other , on the right or the page, is “incontestably” “real”?”~Onebornfree

Ahhh..I got an answer for myself to this “question”:

Because one comes from a movie, and one comes from a real event taken on the streets of Lower Manhattan. Pretty simple to the sane mind, that is if one isn’t a one tricked pony.
Perhaps both orbs are made of glass..?? Aye?

I don’t think anything is incontestable. And I’m not saying the photo could not be fake. But I don’t think the fact that there are several very similar photos necessarily proves this. I grant you that it’s suspicious, but there has to be some evidence in the photos themselves to indicate they are not genuine. What else tells you this? What would be the reason for faking this shot?

P.S. The “overlay” shot is not from the exact same angle, and I don’t find it persuasive.

I just saw your comment sent at 5:38 p.m. for the first time two minutes ago. So I’m not sure what you mean by disappeared. I don’t know how it could appear prior to me approving it. I had no intent to remove any comment.

The very first thing to consider when one reads or hears the title of the manuscript known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, is that this protocol has nothing whatsoever to do with Judaism, but to cloak itself from what it is in naked relief underneath – psychopathic lust for political power. It is a grimoire of megalomania, the authors are worshipers of mammon, and they hold themselves up as gods. The combination is a mix of breed and creed, neither Jewish, Christian, Muslim or any other religious faith. Even attempts to characterize them as literal ‘Satanists’ is a misconception, they care nothing for anything but power and the wealth it brings. They are immoral, so Christians consider them ‘Satan Worshipers’. It is the Christians who believe in Satan, not this power elite. So they leak out fraudulent garbage to further the myths and hang up researchers in endless details of fantastical intrigue – the stuff of comic books.

The most predictable thing results in this; hangers on, wannabe’s and charlatans take up such nonsense and propagate it to appear important. And those who are successful to a point to get noticed and receive promotion and often financing from the mid level oligarchy that understands the importance of PR, and propaganda in perception manipulation. It is a veritable industry and the symbolism is cleverly used in logos and advertising to further the mythology. Everybody climbs aboard because it is hip, cool, “fraught with meaning.” Art directors, movie execs, science fiction authors, comic artists, fashion designers, and wanna be vampires, parade the charade.

And the Elite laugh all their way to their banks and estates. Some of this iconography is even done in fine arts, and the Elites may own and promote these tools as well. Some of the blue blood youth of these Elites may see it as a romantic persona for a time – until they are tapped for responsibilities. The “All Seeing Eye of Horus” is put on the shelf and real business is attended to.

Another thing to remember that much of this symbolism is secular and has meant different things to different philosophies throughout the centuries. The Romantic period of art, and sculpture, and architecture adopted many symbols and myths from classical Egyptian and Roman motifs, as an appreciation of technique and craft as well as subject. The fanatical “Christian” view of all of this as having to do with the devil is again, psychological projection on their part. The artists and philosophers of that era related to an entirely different paradigm, one breaking the trail for an expression of their ideals of Liberty, Justice, and Reason.

These Ideals themselves were then co-opted by the powers that be, the chic and popular thing of the day, and it’s rhetoric taken and spun for their own means. And as this movement in the minds of men, educated in greater numbers than any generation yet began to discover that Liberty was the rightful and natural state of the human being, the Elites became more determined to steal their thunder, and this is where and when the of the penning of the most referenced form of these Protocols, which had been around evolving through the ages, took shape this is the version penned by Weishaupt, the Illuminati version. This version evolved further with reference to technological advances by the early 1900s.

As an age of information developed, it was more difficult to remain behind the scenes, since their operations affect all of commerce, so distractions became more important, and were developed accordingly. Control of general education became a primary goal. If there was to be education, and that was quickly becoming a given, then they had to have a great influence upon it. Their interests are opposed to the general interest in the most extreme manner. The general population must not be allowed to comprehend this. This is why philanthropy became such and important cloak, and the “Humanities” had to be understood as their bastion of high moral fortitude in the eyes of the common people. Yes “the devil” is a liar and a tempter, and so are they, but it is a technique of the soulless, not those who believe in a supernatural power or force. They have no faith in anything but their own cunning. But they are not atheists, all humans have a belief system of some form or another, it is an epistemic necessity. This deep faux “Zionism” is far from agnostic – they believe themselves to be materially divine. After all they reason they are the puppet masters of the world. What else can divinity mean but that?

A more complex understanding of this will come in a later chapter, for the creed does have its beginnings in the Babylonian Talmud and the Kaballah, but these are not strictly Judaic either, having Babylonian, Canaanite and Egyptian roots in them as well as the Levites, a rejected tribe of the true Israelites, and their Torah.
. . . . . . .
Also see:http://cotocrew.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/scragged-again/

Dear Mr. Rogue, I enjoyed the read. In particular, the following passage:

Even attempts to characterize them as literal ‘Satanists’ is a misconception, they care nothing for anything but power and the wealth it brings. They are immoral, so Christians consider them ‘Satan Worshipers’. It is the Christians who believe in Satan, not this power elite. So they leak out fraudulent garbage to further the myths and hang up researchers in endless details of fantastical intrigue – the stuff of comic books.

Very interesting, so you believe the monarchy of Britain induces birth to land on certain occult power dates is just for money and power without regard to “sacrifice” or Satan in order to obtain other worldly considerations? Or how about all the destruction and the dates they are done on…. I was thinking of the Gulf during one of the most important occult series of dates of the year April 19 through May 6. The gulf occurred on April 20 and the magic number of 11 citizens died that date. All of these examples are pretty elaborate to go through just to laugh at the cattle. I suspect there is more when you begin to dig into their history and how long they have been doing this and pass it on generation to generation. A book called Transformation, that was banned here in the States was written by Cathy O’brien who experienced these evil ones dark satanic rituals that cost her not only her own innocense but the spirital life of her own daughter.

No, I think tradition, beliefs that transcend generations and time are not that easy to discard when they are almost hard wired into person on a daily basis since birth. I find that the expense, ritual, and secrecy of the goings on at the Bohemian grove belie that theory. Just MHO. What bothered me most about what you wrote, was your “assumptions” about the people who are conspiracy theorists and why they delve into it. You attribute very interesting reasons for it, without knowing them personally. Why is that? Is t here a smiggen of projection contained in that analysis?? Is that what would motivate you to do deep research into some side topic? I think the looking glass theory is in play here. “Do we see the world as we are?” I wonder.

Craig McKee said: “… I don’t think the fact that there are several very similar photos necessarily proves this. I grant you that it’s suspicious, but there has to be some evidence in the photos themselves to indicate they are not genuine. What else tells you this? What would be the reason for faking this shot?

P.S. The “overlay” shot is not from the exact same angle, and I don’t find it persuasive.”

To take your last remark first Craig – how can you claim a different angle when the foreground building is exactly overlaid for both photos? Look at the windows of that foreground building, they exactly compare size-wise/angle for both photos – only the lamppost is missing somehow 🙂 .

Also, in the smaller[overlaid] photo, did you not see the obvious, 3x repeated [i.e. cloned] smoke pattern on the left hand side of the picture ? [ignoring the other scenic differences for now.]

Craig McKee said: “What else tells you this?”

How about the simple fact that they all contain entirely contradictory features, such as lampposts, trees, other buildings within them?

Craig McKee said: “What would be the reason for faking this shot?”

It is a [much needed] psychological reinforcement of the official myth , as far as I can see [just as all of the rest of the NIST, 2010 “cumulus” faked imagery info-dump was].

A more important question for you to ponder might be : as an investigator, why would you even accept this photo and others like it as unquestionably genuine in the first place? On what investigative grounds? Why the favorable bias towards an important image that is, after all, a part of the governments ongoing psyop 9/11 reinforcement program?

You’re right; I clearly see the cloned smoke on the left of the overlaid photo. Definitely tampered with. The overlaid photo is from a slightly more front-on angle than the one underneath it. A subtle difference but perhaps enough that could account for the differences? I wonder if you have considered the possibility that people could have been planted to take the shot at the key moment. Another thing that intrigues me is that these shots contradict the official story because they show the top of the building falling sideways. Without explosives, it would have fallen over and hit the ground, no?

This would answer most of your “questions” OBF…if you actually wanted to know.
………….
And Craig, why would the government plant photographers to take photo’s of something that shoots the official story in the foot? Can you imagine being in the area, having a loaded camera, seeing what was happening and NOT taking a shot?

I’m not suggesting that they did this, I just wondered whether OBF did prior to concluding that the photos are fake. They do contradict the OS as I noted. OBF does have a point when he notes that many of these photos seem to have been taken at the exact same moment. It’s at least curious, although I guess you could argue that people would naturally point their cameras at the building the second they notice the “collapse” start.

If you look closely at the comp of the 8 different shots, you will see the variance in time by noting the drop of the dust cloud. Some are quite similar – none are “exact”.
But I am through wasting my time on this subject – I have taken too much time on it as it is.

As I have said, as far as I am concerned it is the ‘video fakery’ proposition that is the psyop – to erase all of the best evidence. I think buying into it at all is a grave error on the part of genuine 9/11 research.

I agree with this one point, I think this one photo with the obvious cloned smoke on the left was widened for some reason – perhaps editorially to fit in a particular composition. However I don’t think this is evidence that the whole photo is a fake; or even to use the term “tampered with”.

Most publications didn’t see these images as “evidence”, they viewed them as illustrations of what happened that day. If a photo was at an odd angle in the original shot, one might want to widen or cut off areas to realign it so that the horizontal wasn’t angled too extremely.

I have seen too much of this aspect forced into the ‘visual fakery’ jive by people who do not know the first thing about photography – Shack and OBF for example. And if any out there have read my essay on the subject, many aspects are directly cited therein.

As a journalist for 25 years and someone who laid out a newspaper for 10 of those years, I can say that I’ve never heard of material being added to a photo to make it fit a particular composition – especially not with something as contentious as 9/11. If fake smoke has been added to a photo, then that photo has clearly been tampered with, and it is no more a reliable source of information. That doesn’t mean they’re all fake, but it does mean that you can’t trust that one.

What the conspiracy theorist often fails to realize, however, is that those working for the state are often just as clueless as the average citizen when it comes to the origin and function of the forces at work to subvert it. The strength of a conspiracy, after all, rests in the limited number of persons who are aware of its existence and parameters. No one has the entire picture. Each member of the state apparatus only has possession of a single piece of an enormous jigsaw puzzle. Putting together all these disparate pieces—particularly when one does not have the original picture to work from—is a soul-destroying enterprise that consumes decades of work and years of one’s life. This is especially true when the state has in its arsenal of lies the techniques of disinformation and misdirection, of false testimony and planted documents.

I hate that.

The author has both stated what most of us already (should) know but has “balanced” the whole piece by pigeonholing anybody who questions the official line as “conspiracy theorists” in the negative cult-like hysterical sense. That even if one simply believes that there was a conspiracy to harm, defraud or kill the general population, those people are immediately bundled under the banner of “conspiracy theorist”.

So what draws the line between the author who is apparently aware of the alternate realities created through church, education, politicians, the “secret services” and media, and those he has sublimely insulted?

Craig McKee said: “I don’t know why it reappeared, but the awaiting moderation could be because I was a minute or two away from approving it (which happened around the same time as your most recent comment.”

It is now 9 am EST. Last night [12 am] I replied to you regarding your comments on the photos. My comment appeared almost immediately, but with the words ” your comment is awaiting moderation” at the top. On rechecking your site at 8 am this morning [refreshing page], my comment was still there [17 comments total] . Now [9am] my comment is nowhere to be seen.

I predict that this new comment will also immediately appear with the words “your comment is awaiting moderation” at the top. I did screen shots of yesterdays comments, so I’m not “seeing things” – however I did not screen shot the comment I sent last night at 12 am [and that was viewable here-at least to me- for a few hours before disappearing] .

Craig McKee said: “I wonder if you have considered the possibility that people could have been planted to take the shot at the key moment.”

Wasn’t the entire area evacuated before this collapse? And even if that were nor true, what are the odds of even 2 photographers. standing right next to each other, and both alert/psychic enough to capture the exact same moment in time, let alone 8 different camera persons anticipating the same event, all apparently [and inexplicably] within feet of each other doing that?

Just another fabulous 9/11 coincidence perhaps, like the live networks numerous, miraculously timely zoom-ins/zoom outs? http://www.septemberclues.info/simulated_sceneries.htm [ click on link ,then on the words “miracle zooms” at the top right of the page to see examples of this “prescient camera- person” miracle zoom phenomenon].

And what about the cloned smoke you are now aware of ?

Craig McKee said: “Another thing that intrigues me is that these shots contradict the official story because they show the top of the building falling sideways. ” .

I don’t see how they contradict the official story- they reinforce it [or attempt to], as far as I can see. The entire picture series reinforces the belief that the towers fell within the [under 20 sec.]time frame shown in the network videos, [and at the same time of day, and in the same order], and the tilting of the top section is even a feature of some of the original alleged “live” network sequences, if I recall correctly.

Craig McKee said: “Without explosives, it would have fallen over and hit the ground, no?”

I don’t understand your point, Craig. How could it have collapsed at all without some type of explosive charges?

And, _with_ explosives, as far as I am aware, no standard demolitions of very tall buildings are carried out by starting from the top, to initiate a[n impossible] top-down collapse. All tall buildings are routinely demolished from the ground up, so that the top falls straight down after the far stronger base and lower sections have already been removed by explosive charges, into the buildings own “footprint”. http://heiwaco.tripod.com/tower.htm

As I asked before: A more important question for you to ponder might be : as an investigator, why would you even accept this photo and others like it as unquestionably genuine in the first place? On what investigative grounds? Why the bias in favor of authenticity towards this image series?

Regards, onebornfree.

P.S. Different network videos of WTC1’s collapse, from almost the exact same angle, clearly show the top of the N. tower collapsing in 2 opposite directions! What’s up with that? 🙂 [I’ll try to find/post links if you are interested]

This brings me back to what I wrote earlier, that I don’t think anything is incontestable. It’s not a bias in favour of authenticity, it’s that there has to clear reason to believe a photo is fake. You seem to have a bias that all the photos are fake. I have an open mind to whatever the evidence shows.

What I meant about the official story is that the fact that the top of the building is falling over means that, minus another force acting on it, it would continue to fall over and land on the ground. But it never hit the ground; it turned to dust (at least the concrete did) in mid air.

I understand that explosives had to have been used to bring the building down. But the top of the building did not hit the ground as its momentum would have suggested it would. So that confirms that the part of the building above impact had to be destroyed before it hit the ground. That’s what I mean about the photos contradicting the official story.

Craig McKee said: “This brings me back to what I wrote earlier, that I don’t think anything is incontestable. It’s not a bias in favour of authenticity, it’s that there has to clear reason to believe a photo is fake. You seem to have a bias that all the photos are fake. ”

Historically, to date , you have always assumed the photo that graces the top right of your page [and its cousins/companions presumably] , is genuine, yes?

My point was: why would an investigator [you] ever start from the assumption that the photos are genuine, then look for proof of them being fake, and then , in order to be able to ever prove them fake to yourself, have to overcome that initial pre-bias/self-imposed mental obstacle to it/them being fake?

As far as I can tell from what you now write, unless I am misunderstanding, you are still assuming them all to be genuine:

It may seem like an irrelevant/too fine distinction for yourself, but procedurally, there is a vast difference between starting from the position of “.. there has to clear reason to believe a photo is fake” , as you revealingly said, and : “there has to be a clear reason to believe a photo is _real_” [i.e. what you did _not_say.]

My question is: on what procedural basis [i.e. “scientific” or “legal”] does an investigator justifiably start their investigation from a position of pre-bias towards any evidence that supports/reinforces the governments story? [Something to consider, maybe?]

Craig McKee said: “What I meant about the official story is that the fact that the top of the building is falling over means that, minus another force acting on it, it would continue to fall over and land on the ground. But it never hit the ground; it turned to dust (at least the concrete did) in mid air.”

This probably seems like a stupid question Craig, but I have to ask: how do you know for certain it turned to dust in mid air?

So OBL is going to be allowed to twist this very interesting topic into another circular, negative, “Craig McKee is f*cking with my posts”, “all of you are shills” monologue where he expects answers but won’t reply to them?

What’s the point when anybody reading this blog will have to sift through reams of paranoid, cul-de-sac “arguments” for the topic at hand?

This “image fakery” proposition is OBVIOUSLY a disingenuous vile psyop, in that the very foundation of it is absurd:

We are to presume that while what REALLY went on at the WTC complex was in someway “veiled” by some new high-tech ‘military smokescreen’, wherein all of the first responders flooding into the area suddenly…what? Disappear behind the smokescreen? All of the noise is dampened as well?

What is everyone actually seeing at the point in-which the planes first struck the towers, all the time until the actual global destruction takes place?

And then we have to suffer through this rhetorical bullshit like OBF’s post of, DECEMBER 12, 2012 – 3:34 PM; wherein he prattles off this seemingly “reasonable” argument as to do with BIAS for christsake! He speaks to the “assumptions” that a photo record was made of what happened that day as if said assumptions were somehow flawed and false, because?
Well of course it is much more reasonable to ‘assume’ some far fetched, in fact impossible assumption that nothing of what really happened could be seen, let alone photographed.

Also again, as far as I am concerned, if OBF really believes his own PR he’s F’n crazy.
There are so many sound technical reasons that prove this whole fakery idea false from the very ground on up, that it should be clear to anyone of sound mind that the whole thing is a load of bullshit. But not simply bullshit, it is a vile sinister attempt to erase the visual record of that day – to wipe all of that evidence off of the table.

I remember a high school teacher of mine saying that it won’t be long before we’ll be watching movies with apparently regular actors that will in fact be simulations based on images and voice from the person. I thought he was crazy. But he wasn’t.

Craig McKee said : “There’s no reason for others not to continue or resume a topical conversation. ”

Actually Craig, I fail to see how a discussion between you and I of what should automatically be considered as real/genuine, and what should not be automatically considered as such in any investigation into the events of 9/11, is not _directly_ relevant to the topic at hand. [i.e. Artificially created “realities”]

To put it another way, is the photo at top right on your page here just as much a part of a false reality [i.e a small part of a false, artificially induced visual matrix] as the actual still from the “Matrix” movie you use to head the article, or not?

If the tower photo [top right] you/they currently consider to be real is actually a fake [as I propose], then the photo you actually know to be fake [i.e. the still from “The Matrix” movie] , is actually more real than that pic of the tower collapse you have at top right. At least you already know that the Matrix movie still is deliberately artificial, right?

‘Seems simple enough to me. The fact that others here simple-mindedly prefer to choose to see it as a “hijack” of the thread ,however, speaks volumes as to their own transparent agendas/biases, and consistent lack of critical thinking/speculative ability, at least to myself. All are definitely and incurably stuck inside “the 9/11 matrix”, to my mind.

And , [still on topic to my mind] to repeat my previous [matrix]question: how do you know for certain the tower turned to dust in mid air? 🙂

I am very much aware of this, and it is appropriate that you mention it. I have done a lot of work examining the 9/11 foreshadowing in Hollywood movies, especially those released in the late 1990s. You’ll definitely hear more from me on this topic in the future.

Although it is hard to see in the above clip, Anderson/Neo opens the book to the chapter titled “On Nihilism”.

Some quotes from that chapter:

“The universe, and all of us, have entered live into simulation, into the malefic, not even malefic, indifferent, sphere of deterrence: in a bizarre fashion, nihilism has been entirely realized no longer through destruction, but through simulation and deterrence.”

“Against this hegemony of the system, one can exalt the ruses of desire, practice revolutionary micrology of the quotidian, exalt the molecular drift or even defend cooking. This does not resolve the imperious necessity of checking the system in broad daylight.
This, only terrorism can do.”

Some quotes from other chapters :

“This is how all the holdups, airplane hijackings, etc. are now in some sense simulation holdups in that they are already inscribed in the decoding and orchestration rituals of the media, anticipated in their presentation and their possible consequences.”

“Today, it is the real that has become the alibi of the model, in a world controlled by the principle of simulation. And, paradoxically, it is the real that has become our true Utopia—but a Utopia that is no longer in the realm of the possible, that can only be dreamt of as one would dream of a lost object.”

” Disneyland is presented as imaginary in order to make us believe that the rest is real, whereas all of Los Angeles and the America that surrounds it are no longer real, but belong to the hyperreal order and to the order of simulation. ”

“Illusion is no longer possible, because the real is no longer possible.”

“Is any given bombing in Italy the work of leftist extremists, or extreme-right provocation, or a centrist mise-en-scène to discredit all extreme terrorists and to shore up its own failing power, or again, is it a police-inspired scenario and a form of blackmail to public security? All of this is simultaneously true, and the search for proof, indeed the objectivity of the facts does not put an end to this vertigo of interpretation.”

Baudrillard’s book was required reading for the lead actors hired for the movie “The Matrix”:

Baudrillard also wrote a book about the first Iraqi war, in 1991, entitled “The Gulf War Did Not Take Place”, underlining the artificiality of the whole thing, and how the war itself was a simulation and a rite, more than an actual war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard

Regards, onebornfree.

P.S Still no thoughts as to exactly why you believe you know for certain that the concrete in the tower in the photos previously discussed “turned to dust” as you said, Craig?

I guess I’ll just have to answer my own question then 🙂 : because that is what you’ve been told, read and possibly seen in alleged genuine photos, or in alleged live footage of the towers collapse, and therefor already assumed to be true, correct?

It takes some sophistication in thinking to realize that Theology is speculation, concurrently to see that Philosophy is the same; simple speculation.
If you have doubts about what reality is, take a razor blade and slice about an eighth of an inch deep slit in the tip of your finger; then try to convince yourself not to bleed and that it does not hurt.

What you believe is what you get.

If you are reading these words right now, let me show you what you really believe. You believe you are sitting there looking at the monitor, and that there are all of these paraphernalia around you and that it is in the way that to go through the physical motions of handling said paraphernalia that is allowing my thoughts to inter your consciousness NOW as you read this. You may glance around and peruse your surroundings, and hear the various sounds and noises, perhaps smell the aroma in the room. That is what you believe in at the moment, for that is which is manifest. Other moments are just stories, recall or dreams of what might be. Is, has been, will be, is all in this eternal moment.
It is NOW right now, it will be NOW if you might think on this ‘later’, and it will be NOW as you go on to do whatever you might when you stop reading this.

NOW is the moment of POWER.

Going through the physical motions of handling the paraphernalia is the Ritual I have been talking about. Because of what we are told and shown to expect we are initiated into these rituals from our first moments here. We are programmed to believe that this all works, and it is in said believing that it manifests.

There have been alternative belief systems throughout time. And it is time that is the greatest mystery, and how it takes a future to manifest that which always has been and always will be.

This is a state of wonder.

Yes, I am saying getting what you want is as easy as changing your mind.
BUT…changing your mind isn’t actually all that easy is it?

That is the catch. But remember the words of Morpheus; “I never said it would be easy, I said it would be the truth.”

I personally think that OBF’s theories have been seriously challenged, questioned, and debunked with valid and reasonable points and observations. OBF has consistently failed to respond meaningfully to any of these challenges. I feel strongly that if a person cannot or does not respond meaningfully when his theories are challenged that he or she should be required to respond to those challenges prior to ever posting those theories again. Unless and until OBF can address the fundamental and serious issues with his/her/it’s theories they should not be posted again. At this point OBF is like a lawyer who presents material that is objected to in a court of law and the judge has sustained the objection yet he ignores the objection and the judges ruling and keeps presenting the material anyway. That crap won’t fly in court and it should not here either. It is not censorship to stop a questionable theory from being promoted so long as the person has ample opportunity to respond with counter arguments. OBF has had ample opportunity.

To be blunt about this Craig if OBF cannot respond meaningfully to valid critiques then his/her/it’s theories are most likely bullshit and maybe intentional disinformation. I am sick of it personally and it makes me want to leave the blog altogether (I won’t do that but I do want to at times). I think OBF needs to really answer critiques or shut the hell up about video fakery altogether. It seems clear to me it is being done to derail the good discussions we have. Pin OBF down man, force an answer or block future posts that have anything to do with video fakery.

The Matrix was about the perfect computer program that could dupe 6 billion people into believing that they were alive, experiencing real life in real time. It was perfect because of the subtle and glaring imperfections weaved throughout the program, that real life throws at us.

It’s the ultimate alternative reality set up through an intricate mathematical impossibility through simultaneously juggling and interweaving billions of individual realities. Each of those billions of realities is further broken down to an individual level. Taste, smells, sights, touch, even breathing. It’s pure fiction because the prospect of such a program is totally impossible. It’s beyond genius, absolute control and perfection.

What OBF is proposing is along the same lines. Not to the power of 6 billion as with the Matrix but on a similar scale.

Every single image and video was faked. Every single witness is a stooge. All set in motion simultaneously at 09:03 am om September 11 2001.

The funniest thing is that he uses one of those “fake” videos (the south tower impact video) to build an entire thesis around.

“Planes can’t cut through steel so it must be fake”

If it’s “fake” how can it be used to substantiate anything?

Anyway…

OBF’s style of “debate” is based on the Matrix. He has a wide sweeping form of dismissal for any multitude of counterarguments. If you look in detail at his hand waving away of each argument and convert it into actual logistics, timing, personnel and synchronicity, you’re left with a Matrix like scenario.

The reality is that black ops or false flags are kept as simple as possible. Get in there, do it, fuck you and lie. The “art” of black ops is in the aftermath. The plans A through to Z. Denial. Laying breadcrumbs. Tidying up loose ends. A bought and paid for whore media. And most important of all, distracting an already ignorant, nodding dog, apathetic public. That’s the trick to cut out the need for a Matrix like operation. Not the horseshit OBL is selling.

The Despot Host with the Most. Cool Daddio swing on. Let us dispose of this nonsense once and for all__let’s just have a global disposal party and go out with one mighty bang.
It could be a Clackmas Tree decorated with unnamed friends and anonymous AK 47s, with background muzak by the Gloomtown Brats.

A Writual of Hateus Corpses…then we can start a fresh dream.
I’ll brew the java, you bring the cream.

Okay, I have had trouble with certain aspects of this story since the book was first released.

It is no secret that S. K. Bain is the former art director of Weekly Standard magazine. In other words in a certain sense he is from Mordor himself.

What I would like to see in the interview Mr McKee is a thorough interrogation on this aspect of his career. He worked with the people who were obviously involved in engineering 9/11.
What does Bain say about PNAC in his book? How does he cover his former employers?
Does he go into the subject of “Revelation of the Method”?
Is this book in a sense a sanctioned Revelation of the Method? Or is it in fact a clever veil to cover the method?

As we all know, the psychological operation of 9/11 hit the pavement on 9/11. But that operation continues on daily and has been. Is Bain a part of this psyop? Is he ‘unkowingly’ part of the psyop? Does he suspect that there is some reason he has been able to go into these things without censure?

I have read several glowing reviews of this book on Amazon. But one of my comrades on COTO got the book. She said simply, “it is a bore, don’t bother with it”. She felt that the nuts and bolts of the operation are glossed over, and felt that there was misdirection involved.
She felt the book is ‘child’s play’ compared to the deep discussions we have had on the subject at C1.

So, I would like for Craig to keep these aspects in mind during his interview with Mr Bain.

For a sound epistemology we must demarcate between that which is speculative, and that which is empirically proven to be so – at least as far as speaking to physical life in the time-space-continuum. We should be careful to not become so enamored with our analogies and allegories as to take them as literal.
Allegory and analogy are very much based in Taoist thought – in that “like is not.” We may describe what some possible scenario may be like, but that is not what it is.

A picture of a horse is like a horse in a great many ways, but it is a picture first and foremost, it is certainly not a horse. Pictures of horses may be educational and teach us much about horses. But to really know a horse, one must come in personal contact with a real horse. And then even that is not to know all horses. One may learn general things about all horses from one or a few horses, but there will always be some horse substantially different than your experiences.

The complexity of actually knowing and understanding such common things as these should give some idea of the complexity of figuring out things that are in fact utter mysteries and perhaps simply a matter of our own imaginings.

So when we consider that reality may be in some way like it is presented in The Matrix, let us not get lost in the particular nomenclature of that film. It is meant as, presented as, and is speculative fiction, an allegory. And it is in that sense very much an expression of Taoism. The Hindu concept of Maya can be said to touch on the very same chord, in that it is the idea that all is illusion. And these are metaphysical concepts, just like quantum theory is, or the Big Bang theory is. These ‘sciences’ that attempt to explain what is beyond physics are the exact definition of metaphysical.

So the very term “metaphysical” should be rethought to include what is viewed in this psychologically manipulated culture as “scientific reality”. For actually we are living in a mythical paradigm as complete as that analogized in the film The Matrix.

@ Craig McKee: did you see my post regarding the philosopher Baudrillard and his book “Simulacra and Simulation”, which is deliberately featured in the Matrix movie, Craig, or were you already aware of this aspect of the movie ?

I knew about the book being in the movie, but I didn’t have much knowledge of the content of the book. Your comment has encouraged me to look deeper. What is your theory about the date on the passport?

“Is any given bombing in Italy the work of leftist extremists, or extreme-right provocation, or a centrist mise-en-scène to discredit all extreme terrorists and to shore up its own failing power, or again, is it a police-inspired scenario and a form of blackmail to public security? All of this is simultaneously true, and the search for proof, indeed the objectivity of the facts does not put an end to this vertigo of interpretation.”~Baudrillard

Now I am seeing what this attraction to Baudrillard has for OBF.

It is this type of ‘deconstruction’ that is very similar to OBF’s ploy of “Video Fakery”.

In other words, “NOTHING IS REAL.”

Keep in mind that these bombings in Italy that Baudrillard speaks to are proven to be the work of the Gladio network of “stay behind” fascists {from WWII}. Baudrillard has cleverly muddied the issue with his, may I say, crackpot “philosophy”; it is very much the work of a provocateur when seen in this light.

His articles on US attack on Iraq by Bush Sr. are the same sort of denial as this assertion to dismiss the NATO/Gladio origin of the bombing campaigns in Italy.

Again, we may fascinate on these types of ideas as speculative fiction, but as far as use in a forensic study that actually makes sense in our material “consensus reality”, it simply leads to mental mayhem.

Craig McKee said: “I knew about the book being in the movie, but I didn’t have much knowledge of the content of the book. Your comment has encouraged me to look deeper. What is your theory about the date on the passport?”

That it was deliberately inserted into the movie,[ as was the Baudrillard reference, obviously], by the movie makers themselves [ obviously chosen insiders], to send an “in plain sight” [but veiled] message to the plebiscite.

The perps are arrogant and basically saying to us all:

” we can do what we like- you people are mostly stupid; with current technology we can pre-fabricate an entire series of events, [i,e fake reality] complete with planes doing impossible things, and buildings collapsing top down at impossible speeds, then later broadcast it as a live event on MSM outlets, and still, almost everyone will believe it actually happened just as broadcast. We can even hint/tell you in advance what we are going to do, in movies like “The Matrix” and you are still all too stupid to see what’s coming down, or to prevent it. We can do whatever we like, whenever we like. As George Carlin said, we “got you by the balls”. ”

And, judging by the ongoing “yahoo” reaction to the proposition of network video fakery being primarily involved in the events of 9/11 seen on this forum and elsewhere, I’d have to say that obviously they were/are absolutely correct [ which accounts for their arrogance ] 🙂 .

These people [whoever they may be] know exactly what they are doing, and exactly how stupid, boorish and trusting the US population in general is towards the MSM ,and exactly how far they can push “it”, without more than a few people discovering their methods

What is the apparent deep seated “meaning” of the numerals? It seems to have been an aspect of human psychology for ages:

“Thout, also known as Tout, is the first month of the Coptic calendar. It lies between 11 September and 10 October of the Gregorian calendar. The month of Thout is also the first month of the Season of ‘Akhet’ (Inundation) in Ancient Egypt, when the Nile floods cover the land of Egypt. The name of the month comes from Thoth, the Ancient Egyptian God of Wisdom.”

We have addressed the various pre 2001 seeming references to 9/11 in film and music before on this forum; such as Matt Goering’s in the Simpson’s episode, the opening dialog in Mel Gibson’s THE PATRIOT; “Nine pounds eleven ounces”…

I’m sure a full accounting of all such references would be difficult to compile, and may range in the hundreds. What could it all mean? Precognition? Déjà Vu? Revelation of the Method?
Preconditioning processing?

I think we can theorize to our hearts content. But an issue like this is pretty hard to resolve and determine with any finality.

OBF’s style of “debate” is based on the Matrix. He has a wide sweeping form of dismissal for any multitude of counterarguments. If you look in detail at his hand waving away of each argument and convert it into actual logistics, timing, personnel and synchronicity, you’re left with a Matrix like scenario.

No comment?

I’ve no doubt that the sick individuals that have been calling the shots over the past century or two see themselves as the “elite”. That any number of books have been written, videos released and years of research done (a lot of which is fascinating) on the occult, connections, bloodlines, etc. The significance of numerology comes to the fore.

In reality, all I see this line of investigation as is a look into the minds of madmen. They have had all of the money and power. They are soulless psychotics. I don’t really care what their history is. Their bloodlines. Their “beliefs”. I’ve delved into it myself and it did what it was designed to do. Tie us in knots. Confuse. Even glamorize or mysticize their roots and their being.

To hell with it.

We know that they have completely dehumanized (the collective) us. We know that they have complete control of information, military and (possibly ancient) knowledge.

They see us as an experiment. One big lab. In all likelihood they saw 9/11 as the experiment. A gauge as to how far they could dupe the world. They probably expected (maybe even wanted) mass revolt.

The freemason angle and the pyramid that these people are trying to climb is no more than a confidence trick. A mixture of occult freaks playing with ambitious, greedy assholes that make up the military, media and political landscape, controlled by child porn, blackmail, money, position and CIA/MOSSAD manufactured secrets. Nothing romantic about it at all.

Even if there is a centuries or millenia old history behind these people, we need to cut through the fog. They are serial killers in positions of power. We are the bloodied meat they’re masturbating over.

Yes for sure I agree about OBF being a stooge handwaver with an idiot story about 9/11__I don’t know how much clearer I can say that.

I also agree that the goonsquad is to totally out of the closet now that all the yada about who they might be is hyperbole__we know who the perps are and who their agents on the ground and on the air are.

We are right on the verge of the “Great Leap Forward” for the West…on [FFWD] from Aurora Col. to the school yard in Connecticut today…gun grab theater in bloody color.

I gotta feeling we might be in full lockdown by New Years Day.

Did you see the fake tears from the fake prez on TV? gag me with a spoon.

What does it mean? Bain provides an important element of answer in his book. 9/11’s symbolic and numerologic content sent a message to individuals who are evil-minded and cognizant of it: “we are with you and we are powerful, so you may want to join us for your own egoistic good.”

This ties in with Lobaczewski’s “Political Ponerology,” which explains, among many other things, that a budding totalitarian regime needs, at some point, to foment enough hysteria and doublespeak for essential psychopaths and other mental deviants deprived of empathy to understand that the government is their natural friend and that they ought to join it for their own egoistic good. The rulers’ challenge is to keep the hysteria low enough for mentally normal people to not take notice. A delicate balancing exercise which often fails…

By “mentally normal people, ” I meant people who are endowed with a normal level of empathy, as opposed to the deviants who live with an empathy deficit. Sorry for the over-simplification. Lobaczewski claims that his colleagues’ and his studies showed that totalitarian regimes–which he calls pathocraties–function by extracting unempathic mental deviants from the population and reserving all positions of authority to them. One of their challenges is that the large majority (80% or so) of normal people not notice their work until they have put in place their pathocratic structure.

Going back to Bain’s “9/11 as a Mass Ritual,” mental deviants knowledgeable in the numerology and symbology used must have gotten the message. On the other hand, the large majority of mentally normal individuals who know symbology and numerology only from their absence from school curricula and occasional hit pieces ridiculing them not only fail to notice the message, but mock any messenger (like Bain) who exposes it.

There exist many clues that processes exist to lure unempathic deviants into positions of authority. Bain exposed one more.

I understand the physical disfigurement of the amygdala in cases of true ‘born’ psychopaths, and the distinction between sociopaths; with conditioned behaviors that mirror the psychopaths.

How is it the so-called “normal” people are so unsuspecting is my point. I see that as due to neurosis, which has much to do with obedience to authority. I am sure you must be familiar with Milgram and his studies on obedience to authority. Even “normal” people can be easily compelled to act as if they have no empathy. This to me, is as disconcerting as the fact of the ponerist system itself. Such a system would not succeed otherwise.

A two pronged problem needing a multiplier approach to solve. How do you catch the attention of the enchanted? Obviously not through rational argumentation.

Another interesting element in Bain’s thesis is that “conspiracy theorists” may well be an important element in the elite’s ultimate plan. The fact that some of us see through deceptions like 9/11 and yet can’t do anything about them serves to reinforce the idea of the elite’s invincibility. In other words, the “mega-rituals” like 9/11 are more powerful when the truth is right in front of our noses. There’s no big break that is going to blow the case wide open because we already know the official story is a lie. And even if there were a possible break, the messenger will have been discredited sufficiently that no one will be listening. Not enough people, anyway.

Thank you for this reflection. Indeed, I vaguely remember reading something to this effect in Bain’s “9/11 as Mass Ritual.” I quickly looked for it in the book but did not find it. Anyway, Bain is absolutely right within his framework: people who would develop an understanding of the grand conspiracy behind 9/11 based only on his work would be cognizant of an enormous danger but impotent to do anything about it. They may be able conceivably to protect themselves against evil spiritual entities, but certainly not to chase them away from the Earth. And teaching Bain’s complex argument to reasonable skeptics is virtually unthinkable: it is very complex, largely intuitive as opposed to analytical, and vulnerable to ridicule by the same bully pulpits that have steadfastly promoted the official 9/11 myth. Indeed, under this perspective, the Master 9/11 conspirators may even find it funny that a few enlightened people would understand 9/11 and spend their lives in fear because of their impotence to prevent the next false flag.

However, stepping back from “9/11 as Mass Ritual” and looking at all the 9/11-related evidence, it quickly appears that some of it is readily teachable, especially the WTC videos. 9/11, unlike any other major false flag, even features a point of entry compelling enough for skeptics to be unable to refuse it and for bully pulpits to be unable to ridicule it: the epistemological enigma of TV’s worldwide failure to air an inexpensive yet fascinating documentary on “the little office fire that could” disintegrate a steel-framed high-rise with the dexterity expected only from highly qualified demolitionists. It advantageously affirms the official fairy tale and is therefore hard to attack. It puts 9/11 into its most alarming context, namely the existence of some malevolent worldwide information filtering process. And any reasonable individual will perceive this filtering as a personal problem. Accordingly, 9/11 may be, in final analysis, a blessing, and its Master conspirators have reasons to fear a well-aimed 9/11 grassroots effort. It is just that Bain’s work does not aim in the most promising direction at all.

A current example of how stupid the general population is: That the maimstream media can sell the story that this skinny little kid, Adam Lanza could tote in two rifles, two semiauto pistols AND ammo, take out 26 people in a matter of minutes, while leaving the 223 that fired all the shots in the trunk of the mother’s car…

Whether it is still available or not, I saw the copter video of this myself.

I will see if I can get the URL…I doubt it, with this defunct browser my mouse won’t pick them up from a posted video…but the video is posted on a COTO thread which I will get the URL to you shortly.
I will identify the vid on the page as well at that time.

NOW__keep in mind these videos are being removed almost as fast as they are being posted. The PTB is hot on shutting down any but “official” information on this event.
There is even a video on the next page from the the above COTO page, that has a “warning” by the police that any unauthorized _ ei, conspiracy theory -“missinformation” being posted on “social media” will be sought after and prosecuted.

It looks like this event is seen as a keystone op by the Public Relations Regime.
I think we just entered a new phase in the Big Deal.

Craig McKee said: “There is a reason why so many conspiracy “enthusiasts” connect with the concept behind The Matrix.”

A major, major component of the 9/11 “matrix” belief system is the belief that says that planes can fly through multiple steel girders as if they are not even there. If you believe this physical impossibility then obviously, “the matrix has you” :

You KNOW this is horseshit OBF – the crash physics of this have been explained in detail so that a layman can grasp it…and this has been gone over too many times for you to play dumb.

The claim that it is “impossible” for the planes to have crashed through the facade is simply disinformation. This whole video fakery jive is the PSYOP here. And YOU, OBF are culpable for spreading this nonsense.

Objection! OBF has shown no evidence whatsoever to support his contention that the planes could not or would not smash right through the tower facade. NO EVIDENCE! OBF says it is impossible. Well whoopie f’n doo, SAYING something and proving something are two entirely different things.

We on the other hand have presented evidence that the plane(s) had more than enough kinetic energy to smash through the facade as observed on 9/11. Frank DeMartini even said a plane would puncture the facade like a pencil through a screen door and he helped build the WTC. What the hell has OBF offered to back up his bogus assertions? Two things, Jack and Shit.

This is intentional disinformation OBF is AGAIN promoting while systematically ignoring the obvious fatal issues with his theory that have been presented to him/her/it many times.

Unfortunately [but all too predictably] , the Youtube video referenced above that merely detailed the simple fact that the “Dark Knight Rises ” Batman movie contained specific references both to a place called Aurora [ the recent “Batman” shootings allegedly occurred at a cinema in Aurora Colo.] , and to a place called “Sandy Hook” [ called “strike point 1” in a map of Gotham City shown in “The Dark Knight Rises”], was forcibly removed by Google, despite the fact that it contained no graphic violence, nor network scenes from the real life Sandy Hook alleged shooting, as pointed out by the poster of the original video.

You KNOW this is horseshit hybridrogue1 – the crash physics of this have been explained in detail so that a layman can grasp it…and this has been gone over too many times for you to play dumb.

The claim that it is “possible” for the planes to have crashed through the facade is simply disinformation. This whole “the MSM and other videos are real- the MSM does not lie” jive is the PSYOP here. And YOU, hybridrogue1 [and your assorted,mindless suck-ups here] are culpable for spreading this nonsense.

So you finally work up the nerve to address me personally, but you leave the rest to innuendo, aye one-eyed jack-ass?

So…what was this “smoke screen”? You haven’t followed through with the thinking here; obviously because it is a dead-end. There cannot have been simply a ‘blank spot’ in the skyline where the towers stood while all of this magic woowoo was going on.

So, what was visible. If they are hiding the real scene, what replaces it? You have to account for the people in Manhattan. You claim there is some sort of “high tech military smoke screen” so that the real destruction could not be viewed. What? The whole scene just disappears?? For over an hour while “the planes don’t hit the towers”, while “the towers don’t burn with gaping gashes in their sides”, “while they don’t blow up as seen in the video footage”…??? Just fukkin crazy.

This leaves you NOWHERE. You cannot pretend there is a blank canvas to paint these supposed fake visuals onto, because the World Trade Center was there, and people would certainly miss it if it just disappeared.

I won’t ask you to admit how absurd this is in light of this reasoning, but I am sure anyone with two neurons to click together can see that the whole idea is nonsense.

All that is shown on Daboo7’s vid that was trashed by YouTube was a hand resting on a map, with several cellphones on top of it….

The real problem that YouTube has is that the map – supposedly an area in Gotham, is actually a map of Sandy Hook…right where the current school massacre took place.

I have stills from that…in fact those are also on the COTO site mentioned above. I think there is a permanent video of the scene from Dark Knight Rises that YouTube has lobbed off. A download to hard disk by the administrator of the site.

Very little doubt here, the Sandy Hook elementary school was a pro hit…it is part of a larger PSYOP, and there is probably more to come. So many anomalies here that simply cannot be disregarded. Adam Lanza is a dead patsy.

@Hybridrogue1
If you have evidence about a crime -you have very little doubt that this was a ‘pro hit’, for which you must have evidence- then not reporting and covering up that evidence is a crime in itself. Are you going to report your evidence to the police?

Mr. Wright is suffering from what John Rappoport calls. “Matrix programming.”

“One of the great skills of an anchor is the ability to present the news seamlessly. This is what those big paychecks are for: the blends and segues and the underlying tone of sincerity that bleeds into every detail of what is being reported.

That is also hypnotic. It sets up a frequency that moves into the brains of the audience. In those brains, it’s an Acceptance-frequency. It’s the mark of a great news anchor, to be able to transmit that and achieve it.”

The Sunstein recommendation to make the propagation of “Conspiracy Theory” a crime needed a ‘little push’ from the PsychoMarketeers.

I know that using the amendments numbers from the Bill of Rights is convenient code for us.
But the reality here is that there is no constitution in effect in this region of the New World Order. No C = no BofR. So I would advise changing our use of this Newspeak commentary, heretofore referring to our inalienable rights of which there is a penumbra incapable of enumeration {once noted in the 9th – but generally ignored}.

Each false flag effects the entirety of our personal liberties. Each is followed by illegitimate diktat by the illegitimate cabal calling itself “government”.

The message of the moment above is an omen…watch yer Ps and Qs.

The only sane response to Full Spectrum Dominance is Full Spectrum Defiance.

I’ll offer another comment on the NewTown shooting and bring it back on topic. “9/11 as Mass Ritual” exposes the Gifford & Aurora shootings as probable staged events and links them to the predicted atomic false flag in Phoenix in the next few days. It does not speculate on an additional “preparatory” shooting.

Skeptics may take this as a big lapse in Bain’s judgement that compromises his prediciton. Others may skip it as no more than the overlook of an important detail along the road to the nuclear event.

Either way, Bain’s analysis of Newtown’s symbology and numerology will provide interesting reading.

“Behind the meticulously crafted façade a deep vagueness and sorrow remains that cannot be wholly explained away by the made-for-television storyline of an awkward and lagging young man who inexplicably murders his mother, destroys his computer hard drive, gains access to a supposedly high security facility and proficiently executes 26 individuals within minutes. Yet only in an age of almost universal deceit is the public asked to accept such without further inquiry and comment. All the while amidst mass grieving political leaders and public figures showboat their legislative priorities. It is difficult to imagine a more profound marker of an utterly decrepit politics and civil society than the shallow and unquestioning media that churns out a monochromatic worldview while giving adherents the insidious impression of being informed.”~Prof. James F. Tracy

To the Connecticut Police official telling us the only truth comes thru his microphone..

Most all of us can only know what we are witnessing via this medium. By what you say and don’t say. Based on recent History, trusting police spokespeople is no longer an option.

Next time you step up to talk into that fat microphone, you can help alter the generally held view that there is a COVER UP of some kind going on at Sandy Hook by telling us who was captured in the woods behind the school.

why the ‘long weapon’ – the ‘primary weapon’ – was in the vehicle trunk in the car park,

why the weapon was so profoundly mis-treated by a ‘professional’ during later removal – the officer handled every part of the weapon forensics would have been wanting to search for prints.

Why the diametrically opposed reports of weapons being used. News having primary weapons 4 handguns in school ; the medical examiner on-site telling us it was ‘the long rifle’ found in the car park .
Address public concerns properly and internet forums will reflect that.

Yea, COTO has been swamped with page after page on this psyop event…
This seems like 9/11, to be a game changer, or one of those headliner acts at the world concert…

It has definitely put the bullhorn of “Gun Control” on top volume. There is organization to this push, that cannot solely be due to ” a sudden up-welling of human emotions” The crap coming out of “Liberal” Hollywood is vile PR on steroids. It strikes me as the same type of thing as the PATRIOT Act waiting in the wings after 9/11.

But I must say, there is hysteria in the ‘conspiracy theory’ side too. All of these ideas that it was all a staged hoax. That all the victims are simulated, like the bullshit Shack came up with for 9/11, the Dallas Goldbug PSYOP, that it is all done by some actors troupe. Or that the city coroner is a “psychopath” when he gives a press conference where he is clearly exhausted after working for almost 24 hours in a row.

There is a lot of disinfo coming from all sides. A plague of hysteria all ’round.

But the main targets of the agenda behind this will go forward. Those are, gun control to further divide the people. Lockdown schools. And one of the most frightening, the psychiatric testing of ALL Amerikans. This last one is a sleeper that is on it’s legs and walking the dark alleys now. And of course the panopticon just grows larger in every venue every moment.

onesliceshort, off topic…i seem to remember earlier this year that you documented the sources of a number of 9/11 videos and pictures, in a post here on truthandshadows. right? i’ve searched for that post manually (there doesn’t seem to be any search function on this new interface) but cannot find it. can you direct me to it? a&e has asked me to do an article on arguments often used against 9/11 truthers (by the jref crowd, popular mechanics, etc.) and offer some suggested responses. one argument that comes up a lot is “all of the 9/11 videos and pictures on the internet are fake.” as a suggested response, i wanted to note the research you have done on this issue. thanks,
–d

onesliceshort,
no, thank you, that’s not it. it was a thread somewhere here, on truthandshadows. i raised the issue of the need to verify the internet video and photographic evidence of 9/11 (in nyc, especially, as that is a&e’s focus). in court, this would usually entail putting the videographer/photographer on the stand, and having him swear under oath that he filmed what is in the video, and that what we are seeing is a true and accurate representation of what he saw during the filming/picture-taking. you responded with a series of comments indicating that this film was taken by x, and this other video was taken by y, etc.

i do, of course, recognize that we most likely will never get to a court, or even an objective administrative hearing, that will be looking into what really happened on 9/11. still, i think it’s important to verify for posterity that this or that video evidence being presented on the web, is authentic, in a manner that at least approaches what would be acceptable in a court of law. that will be the thrust of a part of the article i am writing for a&e.

thanks much, but i was not able to open any of the links successfully. sometimes my computer crashed, other times i got taken to coding like this “:Ö=3ÄpÇ¸JØîžqôu}üa‰9»ýqŽäv ‘ãÛÏ’ïmÑ/”

what i would really like is a link to what onesliceshort posted here. as i recall it was a link to a number of videos saying who filmed what. as i recall, you appreciated the effort. i’d be especially interested in authenticating the film clips of building 7’s collapse, many of which are here (with no indication as to how they got there, tho some are credited to bbc):

as it stands now, a draft of the article that i am working on (involving typical responses to 9/11 truth advocates’ messages, and how advocates might deal with those reponses) has a bullet point as pasted below my signature. i’d just like to add an easy-to-access link, as indicated, as a sample of how to authenticate. i think the link to onesliceshort’s prior post here on T&S would do the trick, but i still can’t locate it. if a&e publishes the article, with the link, it would serve to send a&e readers here, which should be a good thing.

thanks,
–d
• Attacks against any photographic evidence as obviously having been photo-shopped, or a fraud of some kind. For example, “These clips are obviously forgeries planted by truthers themselves.” In response, state calmly that there is no evidence of this charge, that it is merely a baseless allegation. However, any film, video, or photographic evidence (collectively, “film” evidence herein) that you present as valid, ought to be authenticated. In court, or at an administrative hearing—assuming we ever get there, a highly unlikely scenario, i realize—the authenticity of any film would have to be established by the person introducing it into evidence. How would he or she do that? One way would be to bring in the person who filmed the clip, and have him or her testify under oath that what we are seeing on the film is in fact what he or she saw thru the lens of the device when filming. It is a concern of mine that many 9/11 Truth advocates and well-meaning sites are using film evidence for which the source has not been identified. Thus, in the strictest sense, authenticity of these film clips has not been established. I vew this as a major problem for the 911 Truth movement. I would strongly suggest that if you are going to use film evidence in your presentation, you must know the source, and how the film came to be uploaded on the internet, and track how the film (eventually) came into your possession. Doing so may not be easy. For one 911 Truth Advocate’s effort to deal with this issue, see here [add link to onsliceshort’s T&S’s post].

Before linking to some of those articles and videos about Sandy Hook I had assumed they would be produced by (a) half-wits with 5th rate intellects , conducting their 5th hand investigations from their basements , hundreds or even thousands of miles away, without even setting foot on the scene or interviewing one witness, or examining one piece of physical evidence, starting with a conclusion and the assumtion that anything ‘they were told’ about it, by the media , would be false apart from the things the media said that agreed with their conclusion. But then I realised that they were actually produced by -go to (a)

So YOU, A Wright consider John Rappoport a half-wit with a 5th rate intellect. And all of the backslipping and dismissing of prior reportage by the maimstream media made no impression on you.

Is this a surprise for anyone who has dealt with your arrogant bullshit here before?

I should say not. If there are any 5th rate intellects posting on this thread you can certainly be counted as among them.

If you cannot parse between legitimate research that accounts for the solid evidence of more the a “lone gunman”, but you only focus on the hysterical crap, then you are certainly the one with glowing neon bias.

Feds raid gun store that sold weapon to shooter’s mother after security cameras capture man stealing deadly rifle – just four days before massacre –ATF swoop on the store –Footage of Jordan Marsh removing the 50 calibre long gun –The AR15 was recovered in a duffel bag at the Hartford Hilton –Management at the store didn’t know 11 guns were missing 21 Dec 2012 The East Windsor gun store which sourced at least one of the guns used in the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting was raided by federal firearms agents last night. Officers from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) swooped on Riverside Gun Sales at 5pm yesterday evening, as officers from East Police Department cordoned off the plaza. The raid was a result of security worries at the store after it was revealed the premises had been robbed of a rifle similar to the one used in the Newtown shooting, just four days before the tragedy. A news website showed video footage of 26 year old Jordan Marsh removing the 50 caliber long gun from the store.
. . . . . . . . . .
Jordan Marsh…So is this person in custody now?
Is this person one of the OTHER suspects that was “disappeared” down the maimstream Memory Hole?

There are two extremes. The first is, as Willy stated, the “everything is fake” camp (even to the point where the image of a line of terrified kids was described as a “stunt”) and then there are those, like yourself, that don’t question anything that has been spoonfed to you by the powers that be.

From the global research link

Empowering Myths and Media Manipulation

As the lessons of 9/11 impart, when public knowledge of such horrific events is so woefully deficient the nation’s recollections become the fodder for empowering myths dangerously removed from reality. Devoid of information and effective means for political expression the masses are cajoled to exercise faith and hope in empty promises and an system providing the semblance of empathy, hope and change. Under such circumstances violent calamity, appropriately propagandized by mass media, often provides ample public distraction for decisive political maneuvering.

Journalists capable of exercising a modest degree of autonomy and personal insight would have clearly recognized such leads, thereby extending them to a more rigorous examination of law enforcement spokespersons and the broader Newtown community. Instead, the news media once again wholly abdicated any such responsibility to serve the public by unquestioningly parroting official pronouncements and carefully instructing their audiences on exactly how to interpret the event.

“The anchors are the priests at the funeral before the funeral happens,” journalist Jon Rappoport notes. “They set the stage. They convey to the public the meaning and atmosphere and essence of the whole event. And having done that, there is simply no room for anything that would intrude on this sepulchral mood.”[7]

Behind the meticulously crafted façade a deep vagueness and sorrow remains that cannot be wholly explained away by the made-for-television storyline of an awkward and lagging young man who inexplicably murders his mother, destroys his computer hard drive, gains access to a supposedly high security facility and proficiently executes 26 individuals within minutes. Yet only in an age of almost universal deceit is the public asked to accept such without further inquiry and comment. All the while amidst mass grieving political leaders and public figures showboat their legislative priorities. It is difficult to imagine a more profound marker of an utterly decrepit politics and civil society than the shallow and unquestioning media that churns out a monochromatic worldview while giving adherents the insidious impression of being informed.

You should be wondering what was on that kid’s hard drive. Why the fathers of both this kid and Holmes are connected. Why an allegedly autistic kid would not only carry this deed out but why choose these specific “targets”. Why police and media should synchronize the censoring of earlier reports (on record mind you, just as on 9/11 regarding “van bombs” and Israeli involvement). Why both the kid and one of the alleged victims, his mother, were demonized within 24 hours, based on gossip from locals — “awkward”, “survival nut”, “loner”, when in fact the kid’s school counsellor described him as a “loving and extremely intelligent pupil” (words to that effect).

No 20 year old kid has that much angst and hatred built up to be able to blast his own mother in the head four times and blast 20 5-6 year olds to death. Have you seen the photos of the children? Use your head Wright.

It goes right over his head…because he is a TVZombie, a programmed automaton, a tape-loop player. He will never grasp the true nature of the architecture of political power because he is utterly brainwashed. He is an analog of one of the “pod people” in the film, INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS.

He cannot be reached by logic and rational discourse. It’s like talking to a brick.

I will have no problems with convincing evidence and analysis knocked me off of my neu nookiedoo hobby-horse, but the latest entry into your support documentation — “9/11: The World Trade Center Collapses“ — doesn’t do it.

I am surprised at what your expert “grokking” misses. Just because your support documentation has nifty temperature charts relating to thermite and puts them within a few page-scrolls of images of bent pieces of 9/11 steel does ~not~ prove “cause-and-effect.”

Let us be fair and objective about this. Make your case for how any amount of thermite mixed or not with RDX could sufficiently heat those ~adjacent~ steel beams so quickly and thorough to result in horseshoes and arches (and not blow them apart or leave other explosive marks.)

You see, your mixture is typically deployed in a fashion that is secured right on a steel beam in order to cut it in pieces or blast it to smithereens. I’m good with that. However, the bent beams in question were not wired for demolition; no marks of such are on them. If we stay within the story of thermite, those steel beams were most likely in the vacinity of such. While those colorful charts of temperatures that thermite et al can reach are appropriate for the “burning/cutting edge,” their hot temperature decreases with distance from that edge. The arches themselves needed to be thoroughly heated outside-in, end-to-end to give us what resulted.

Show me the math and science on how thermite can heat steel beams one or more steel beams over, outside-in, end-to-end to make such smooth arches possible. And while you are at it, include calculations — from Dr. Jones perhaps — regarding how much would be required and how long it would take. Put it into a spreadsheet as a function of distance. Not a wild-goose chase or busy work, I assure you. You champion it? You own it; you defend it appropriately with math and science. That link? It doesn’t. It just provides innuendo.

On the other hand, if the source of the heat is a nuclear reaction from a neutron bomb and with its ignition temperature levels reaching several orders of magnitude hotter than those colorful charts, its ability to make hefty steel beams pliable and bendable is much easier to believe. That’s where I’m at.

@ Craig Mckee: Hey Craig,Sleazons Greedings! -speaking of which , the “Sancetta” fake WTC 2 collapse photo you have had on your front page up till now seems to have taken a Christmas vacation, for some reason , “gone walkabout” so to speak 🙂 .

Something to look forward to for all of us connoisseurs of the never-ending stream of government certified, award winning ,fake 9/11 videos/photos that will add to the ever growing trash-pile of the same, but which will still be, at the same time, yet another source of 9/11 amusement, as will be that ever-growing line of poor, naive, government and media-trusting souls who are virtually guaranteed to have [verging on] catatonic fits at the mere suggestion that they are in fact, all fakes.

I don’t need to do math or sort numbers to address your faulty assumptions Señor.

To assume that these twisted beams are the immediate result of the explosions is without foundation. You do not know that they were not bent and twisted while deep within a pile of material weighing thousands of tons on top of them, nor do you consider the reports of it being “like a foundry” down in that mess.

But most important you have no proof of inexplicable radiation. You have no basis thereof to argue that case.

What he calls “assumptions” is evidence that theories of super-duper nano-thermite (and RDX) do not adequately address. Case in point, pay attention to the phrase “like a foundry” in the following:

“To assume that these twisted beams are the immediate result of the explosions is without foundation. You do not know that they were not bent and twisted while deep within a pile of material weighing thousands of tons on top of them, nor do you consider the reports of it being “like a foundry” down in that mess.”

What was it that sustain the foundry like temperatures? Let me guess. I say the hot-spots resemble nuclear devices fizzling, just a few of the many deployed. The alternative theories based on chemical-based explosive and incendiary materials? How long is that imaginary garden hose in which they are packed for their known brissanty burn-rates to account the many-week duration of hot-spots?

Readers of the forum should note the skillful PR hypnotic suggestion:

“But most important you have no proof of inexplicable radiation. You have no basis thereof to argue that case.”

“Inexplicable?!!!” El-Oh-El !!! In other words, if an explanation is provided by the government for the tritium radiation, no matter how lame it is revealed to be from deeper investigation in terms of being able to address comprehensively something other than its “bent scope” of plausible consumer RL devices — that it hasn’t proven and still speculates –, the very fact that it is an explanation means “inexplicable radiation” can be skewered, eh? Most clever and deceitful wordsmithery.

Pay attention to the radiation signature of a neutron nuclear device, technically a fission-triggered-fusion device that allows its neutrons to escape in a directed fashion (upwards). What sort of lingering radiation does it leave?

Let’s put it this way. The closer to the time and place of ignition that measurements are taken, the better, because signature alpha, beta, gamma, and neutron radiation will be greatly dissipated within 48-72 hours. And tritiated water gets diluted, particularly through the actions of firemen and heavy rain storms. Tritium, tritium, tritium. Even in miniscule quantities that are proven to be greater than trace levels, it supports nuclear themes.

“The study on tritium” meets the objectives of its “bent scope” admirably, but when properly understood, it also completely undermines the foundation of Dr. Jones no-nukes article that tries to use it to say “there wasn’t much radiation or tritium. Period.” The “bent scope” didn’t require timely samples taken from relevant locations that included close to hot-spots.

In addition as a blatant omission, Dr. Jones’ analysis of the dust reveal nano-thermite flakes but not correlations of elements proving that fission occurred; neither he nor AE911Truth tested for other explosive residue (e.g., RDX) in the dust. WTF is up with that?

> “Tritium, tritium, tritium. Even in miniscule quantities that are proven to be greater than trace levels, it supports nuclear themes.”

Hysterical bullshit Señor,

As I have pointed out in the commentary section of my post [1], the minuscule quantities of tritium are hardly inexplicable. All it proves is that industrial pollution is at epidemic levels in criminal industrial dumping at landfills.

And it is in these ludicrous round’about carousels that always leaves me to the point of simply saying, “Fuck It” when dealing with you.

As I have pointed out in the commentary section of my post [1], the minuscule quantities of tritium are hardly inexplicable.

It don’t mean shit that the tritium was minuscule, Mr. Rogue. In fact, you are letting this dupe you just because the levels measured at far flung places and days later were below EPA levels, so were christened “safe for humans.”

What matters is that the tritium measured was significantly greater than would be expected. And you would already know this if you had bothered to read my postings on your prologue before having deleted them out of spite, not for their foul language or ad hominem.

Please provide the sources for this:

All it proves is that industrial pollution is at epidemic levels in criminal industrial dumping at landfills.

As far as I can tell, you are pulling this “industrial dumping” out of your ass. Link me to the official 9/11 report that says that industrial dumping at landfills had leakage ~back~ to the WTC to explain their elevated tritium levels on 9/11.

Fool. The tritium ticket was one-way, draining from the WTC complex into various water ways. The tritium was not leaching back from industrial dumping “far, far, away.” And the perpetrators of 9/11 knew this, which is why they bent the scope on the study of tritium and brainstormed tritium sources at the WTC such as airplane exit signs, weapons gun sights, and timepieces… And still had problems with errors in the mathematical modeling as well as evidence. Speculation at its finest!

I think you don’t know squat and haven’t reviewed the “study on tritium” (or my review) to fully appreciate its “bent scope”. The surprise is that this report supports neither Dr. Jones in his no-nukes analysis nor you in your claims of industrial pollution being the source of the tritium.

I appreciate your sentiments of “fuck it” when dealing with me and wish that you would get there sooner.

>“Dr. Jones is a fraud.”~Prager
. . . . . .
And this is the real motive behind Prager’s efforts.

Just like Wood, Reynolds, Fetzer, Señor el Once, and others pushing these New Wave 9/11 theories: it is the attempted character assassination of Prof. Jones.

Why?

To bury this – The Smoking Gun:

“The implications of the discovery of unspent aluminothermic explosives and matching residues in World Trade Center dust are staggering. There is no conceivable reason for there to have been tons of high explosives in the Towers except to demolish them, and demolition is blatantly incompatible with the official 9/11 narrative that the skyscrapers collapsed as a result of the jetliner impacts and fires.”~Prof. Jones

Now I will move on and dispense with your latest posting. Jeff Prager wrote:

Dr. Jones is a fraud.

Mr. Rogue has written on multiple occassions:

And this is the real motive behind Prager’s efforts…. It is the attempted character assassination of Prof. Jones.

No, character assassination is what you do quite well, Mr. Rogue.

What is the difference? The failings, errors, omissions, and faulty assumptions of Dr. Jones’ ~work~ have been brought to light also on many occassions.

I could cut you some slack in not defending Dr. Jones errors, but instead you do the sneaky thing of not even acknowledging the blatant errors in his ~work~. You play the game of getting bent out of shape and ~falsely~ accusing others of “Dr. Jones bashing.”

Where do you get off, Mr. Rogue, in your efforts to defend the character of Dr. Jones when his ~work~ is ligitimately disected and attacked? Why do you always pull the “personal” card? It seems rather hypocritical of you to defend Dr. Jones while attacking Dr. Wood, whose book you have not mined for nuggets of truth.

What is really sad is that the more I dive into Dr. Jones ~work~ on 9/11 themes, the more I’m in agreement with Mr. Prager’s statement “Dr. Jones is a fraud.” This isn’t to say that Dr. Jones never earned a PhD, never taught nuclear physics at BYU, never was a real person, etc. No, no, no.

Because I am so naive and gullible, you’ll have to tell me when a person’s dishonest actions, skew, and “bent scoped”~work~ on the 9/11 theme tips them over the edge of getting their life summed up as being a “fraud.”

BTW, the smoking gun quotation you think is being buried? Au contraire! Been there, done that… on 2012-12-05, to be exact, which you deleted. You obviously didn’t remember it, that’s assuming you read it before purging it, because your arguments are so weak, challenges to their hynotic authority must be deleted. Here was my response on that particular point:

I can embrace the quoted passage from Dr. Jones in its entirety as being valid. The issue is that the “unspent aluminothermic explosives and matching residues in World Trade Center dust” is being hyped as not just the primary destructive mechanism but the sole one as well. Do the math and run the number (or have Dr. Jones do it.)

What does Dr. Jones have to say on the matter? He and Mr. Ryan suspect that the “unspent aluminothermic explosives” account for six or so spikes in the gaseous output of the smoldering WTC pile. But at the end of September (2012), Dr. Jones was saying “Something maintained those high temperatures (not just NT).” Mr. Rogue should enlighten us exactly what was that “something” that “maintained those high temperatures.”

In summary, Mr. Rogue tried the clever ploy of labeling criticism of the ~work~ of Dr. Jones as being an attempted character assassination of Dr. Jones. Two points, because it attempts to character assassinate the critics. And then while side-stepping the criticism, Mr. Rogue brings up a point — a quotation — that was already addressed on his home court, but Mr. Rogue deleted it.

And you know why I delete you there Señor, because of something aside from this banter about nookeedoodoo.

“Dr. Jones was saying “Something maintained those high temperatures (not just NT).”

Yes you cling to this passing phrase as if it is gold, while dismissing everything else the man has said. THAT is bias Señor, that is why I deplore your entire thrust of argumentation.

I advised that you read that article I posted to Mr McKee because if you did read and grok what was therein, you would realize that the witness testimony alone verifies many small and large explosions throughout the entire sequence that simply cannot be accounting for anything nuclear. There is NOTHING in the profile of the event to suggest nukes, there is nothing in the aftermath that indicates nukes, no matter how you rave.

You can dispense with nothing phantom jet, as you have no valid replacement.

Enough, I have had enough of you Señor, your thinking is assbackwards. Your speculation does not jive with the actual data. You are thumping a dead hobby horse.
It’s taking you NOWHERE.

Blogger Sep 2, 2010 The International Center for 9/11 Studies has secured the release of hundreds of hours of video footage and tens of thousands of …
International Center for 9/11 Studies Secures Release of …

Hi Craig,
I just came across this myself, and as I have heard no-one else make mention of this paper I thought I would point it out here:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Journal of 9/11 Studies Letters, November 2012
The Pentagon Attack in Context: a Reply to John Wyndham
By Tod Fletcher and Timothy E. Eastman

After evaluation of the Pentagon events, we conclude that Wyndham’s paper has several flaws that undermine his argument and conclusions, which we discuss in detail below.
Negating his own professed standard, Wyndham fails to consider evidence that conflicts with or undermines the plausibility of his own theory. His paper therefore appears to suffer from “advocacy-based thinking,” in which his theory is promoted without objective consideration of the full range of relevant evidence.

In contrast to Wyndham’s selective approach, the present paper argues for a contextual
and integrative approach to the question of what happened at the Pentagon. By
“contextual approach” we mean one which situates the evidence from the Pentagon attack
site within the larger context of (1) the related events at other locations on 9/11 and the
well-supported inferences based on them, as well as (2) the evidence from both before
and after the events of the day which provide many clues about the perpetrators and their
motives. By “integrative approach” we mean that the most productive analysis will result
from careful consideration of all the different types of evidence that are available.

Yes, I’ve been talking to people privately about this paper, but haven’t had a chance to address it on T & S yet. The whole subject of “papers” advocating a 757 impact will definitely be addressed here very soon. Tod Fletcher is a close colleague of David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, so this paper will offer some interesting points for debate. I look forward to reading your take on it.

Without going into any great detail, I will say that although the Citgo information from CIT is not mentioned directly, the paper certainly puts the information gleaned by the CIT in a more favorable context. The debate on the relevance of the witness testimony is a tacit lead in there.

As we both know the analysis done by CIT is exactly the detailed type that this paper points out that Wyndham breezes past.

All in all I thought that the paper excellent in this regard. So I wanted to point that out from the beginning, to sort of blunt the possible hysterical call that CIT was “ignored again”. I see it, as I said, as a favorable lead-in for the introduction of the CIT evidence, which is very profound in the context that this paper urges.

When we get to this on your blog I will be more detailed in my take on it. But the subtext to this paper leads me to the conclusion that neither of the authors think that an aircraft hit the Pentagon.

I do not dispute the validity of pointing out the hyperbole of my statement:

“The ‘unspent aluminothermic explosives and matching residues in World Trade Center dust’ is being hyped as not just the primary destructive mechanism but the sole one as well.”

My thinking was actually:

“Chemical explosives and incendiaries are being hyped as not just the primary destructive mechanism but the sole one as well.”

Dr. Jones certainly has been saying that his nano-thermite (NT) does not account for everything in the destruction of the towers or the maintenance of under-rubble hot-spot temperatures; NT had help. To account for pulverization, Dr. Jones has suggested RDX for its brissance. Too bad that at the other end in accounting for the maintenance & duration of under-rubble temperatures, RDX’s burn-rate (or that of slower nano-thermite) mathematically implies massive amounts of such chemical explosives and incendiaries that were ~unspent~ from their original pulverizing purpose.

Dr. Jones said in September 2012:

“Something maintained those high temperatures (not just NT).”

So what was that something? Dr. Jones is careful not to say it was RDX, because that doesn’t help explain the evidence, it confounds it. What does Mr. Rogue say the something was?

Mr. Rogue accuses me:

Yes you cling to this passing phrase as if it is gold, while dismissing everything else the man has said. THAT is bias Señor, that is why I deplore your entire thrust of argumentation.

Before explaining why I cling to that passing phrase of Dr. Jones, I refer fact-checking readers to my posting from December 26, 2012 – 8:48 pm, where the third noted quotation is coincidently my own words that say:

“I can embrace the quoted passage from Dr. Jones in its entirety as being valid.”

Thus, the accusation of me “dismissing ~everything~ else the man [Dr. Jones] has said” is easily shot-down, while at the same time demonstrating a failed hynotic assertion, one of many that fills Mr. Rogue’s work.

High school writing classes teach students ~not~ to use over-generalizations in their persuasive papers, phrases with “all”, “every”, “always”, “none”, “never”, “NOTHING” etc. An opponent merely has to find a single exception to discredit the assertion.

So curious readers of this discussion [on Truth & Shadows and COTO] might ask themselves: why did Mr. Rogue fall into this very sophomoric trap of setting his own argumentation up for defeat in the following quote?

The answer is that his hypnotic writing had another purpose in “dubiously persuading” readers.

… the witness testimony alone verifies many small and large explosions throughout the entire sequence that simply cannot be accounting for anything nuclear. There is NOTHING in the profile of the event to suggest nukes, there is nothing in the aftermath that indicates nukes, no matter how you rave. You can dispense with nothing phantom jet, as you have no valid replacement.

[*Snap of the fingers*] The hypnotic PR spell is now broken.

Mr. Rogue is welcome to twist and spin the 9/11 Tetris evidence blocks to fit into his holy theory stack: chemical explosives and incendiaries supposedly being the primary WTC destructive mechanism. However, mostly Mr. Rogue’s words right back at him:

There is SOMETHING in the profile of the event to suggest nukes, there is something in the aftermath that indicates nukes, no matter how [Mr. Rogue raves. He] can dispense with nothing phantom jet, as [he has] no valid replacement.

[Señor El Once] uses a long, complex fraudulent deconstruction of the works of Jones; building a twisted tower of Newspeak rhetoric to befuddle those who cannot follow a technical argument. It is an appeal to a lower common denominator. His arguments may seem plausible at a glance, but if one thinks them through they are nothing but pure air, puffed up with nothing but speculation.

[*Snap of the fingers*] The hypnotic PR spell is now broken.

Mr. Rogue also mentioned:

I advised that you read that article I posted to Mr McKee because if you did read and grok what was therein, you would realize that the witness testimony alone verifies many small and large explosions throughout the entire sequence that simply cannot be accounting for anything nuclear.

The same witness testimony of small and large explosions throughout can acount for something nuclear, because the nookiedoo speculation is (a) that multiple such devices were deployed throughout the WTC, (b) that a neutron bomb’s audio signature from its very design that limits its blast wave could be what witnesses heard, and (c) that nookiedoo is not mutually exclusive with anything due to the thoroughness and redundancies to assure the success of the operation.

It appears that I grok the article better than Mr. Rogue does. Nobody including myself is disputing super-duper nano-thermite’s involvement, which the article makes a good case for. The controversy is when we assume this Wunderwaffe played a primary role. Moreover, the article does ~not~ define the configuration of said super-duper nano-thermite that can account for horse-shoes and arches, despite their pretty pictures nearby. Something else was involved.

[*Snap of the fingers*] The hypnotic PR spell is now broken.

So quickly does the Christmas spirit evaporate from Mr. Rogue’s demeanor and merits being “POLICED” even by moderators of his COTO home court.

(2012-12-26): Enough, I have had enough of you Señor, your thinking is assbackwards. Your speculation does not jive with the actual data. You are thumping a dead hobby horse. It’s taking you NOWHERE.

(2012-12-28): I now reject this anonymous stooge known as, Señor El Once… I do not consider him to be a legitimate member of COTO, but an intruder. He is a stranger in our house.

And that is not all. Here’s the running tally since then of Mr. Rogue’s personal attacks against me.

(2012-12-27): “You think like a cop… You are a skunkwalker Maxifartius.”

(2012-12-28): “Señor el Prick… is the liar… traitor… He is also a pig {a cop} and a PR man for the same cabal of 9/11 movement infiltrators that brought us Judy Woowoo… this disingenuous, lying piece of fecal matter. … an “industrial strength” stooge for the system.”

Rules, such as those of forum regarding personal attacks against its members, aren’t exclusively meant as a constraint on our actions. Those same rules offer protection, the same measure to all, both when adhered to and when fairly applied.

[Señor El Once] has attempted to frame me by projecting his MO onto me from the very first moment that I began posting on the blog, Truth and Shadows more than a year and a half ago now. … [Señor El Once] has been bashing Jones with false allegations for this entire year and a half that I have had the misfortune of dealing with this disingenuous, lying piece of fecal matter.

Ooops, Mr. Rogue, son of Mrs. [x.] A. Wright! Technically a year-and-a-half ago (July 2011), Mr. McKee and I were having stilted discussions with a T&S participant A.Wright. The alias hybridrogue1 did not enter the T&S forums until late Janaury 2012. So, I do not dispute Mr. Rogue’s memory on this or his claim of battling me back in the A.Wright-only days, but do dispute who is projecting whose MO onto whom.

(2012-12-28): I wouldn’t be surprised [Señor El Once] if YOU’RE the one doing the A Wright postings on T+S el Ouncy Bouncy…you think like a cop. You project your trip on others. You are a skunkwalker Maxifartius. The stench is unmistakable.

(2012-12-28): [Señor El Once] is also a pig {a cop} and a PR man for the same cabal of 9/11 movement infiltrators that brought us Judy Woowoo; The Morgan Reynolds-Jim Fetzer Gang, which includes Jeff Prager and numerous other shills. … The entire thrust of this shill campaign is to defame Professor Steven Jones.

Yes, I ACCUSE; the PR person known as [Señor El Once], of being an “industrial strength” stooge for the system, who is purposely spreading disinformation to confuse and disrupt the actual findings of truth in the forensic studies of the 9/11 event.

Keeeyriced on a Krakker – I am sure that the Nookeedodod Buckaroo will appreciate that I am sick of his frickin’ carousel…Let the blathering bla bla bla stand for what it is, a delusional trot fest. There are no spurs.

“Something to look forward to for all of us connoisseurs of the never-ending stream of government certified, award winning ,fake 9/11 videos/photos that will add to the ever growing trash-pile of the same, but which will, at the same time, be yet another source of amusement, as will be that ever-growing legions of poor, naive, government and media-trusting souls who are virtually guaranteed to have [verging on] catatonic fits at the mere suggestion that they are in fact, all computer generated fake images.”

On the other hand, as your own, site-posted Goddard quote attests:

“A society whose citizens refuse to see and investigate the facts, who refuse to believe that their government and their media will routinely lie to them and fabricate a reality that is contrary to verifiable facts, is a society that chooses and deserves the police state dictatorship it is going to get”.-Ian Williams Goddard

“…naive, government and media-trusting souls who are virtually guaranteed to have [verging on] catatonic fits at the mere suggestion that they are in fact, all computer generated fake images.”~OBF

It is not the “mere suggestion,” OBF, and it certainly doesn’t lead to “catatonic fits” – but rather a state of wonder that anyone could be so utterly stupid to buy such a preposterous story as yours.

So get down off your delusional high horse and tell the people gathered here, how does this “secret military smoke screen” work? What are its effects? You don’t have to get technical and tell us the mechanism that creates this affect, what I want you to do is DESCRIBE the effect.

Okay, the “smoke screen” goes up – or comes down…what do we see? Do the people in the vicinity see a ‘blank spot’ where the towers once stood? They have disappeared for your supposed ‘magic act’…what takes their place?

Now, all the responders who have rushed to the area…why did they show up? And once they are within this magic “smoke screen” what is it like in there? A fog, a fog that transmits the suggestion that they are entering a burning building?

If you can’t come up with a plausible answer to these questions, then I think it is well beyond time that you drop your bullshit here. Because as you see, the whole thing falls apart right here at the first proposition – that there was some secret military smoke screen. The necessary effects, to lead to all the rest of your arguments are impossible. Of course the rest of your argument falls apart for numerous technical reasons as well. But here we see that even the launching pad for the proposition is preposterous.

Craig McKee said:
” The photo disappeared quite on its own. I didn’t realize this at first or else I would have removed the description right away.”

Illogical. _Someone_ removed it. Either you inadvertently did so yourself, or somebody else did , surely? I’m guessing you, by mistake, but I could well be wrong – in which case you have been successfully hacked, for whatever reason.

I can assure you I didn’t do it accidentally; it would require a specific effort to remove. Perhaps the link got broken some other way, I don’t know. I’m not sure why someone would hack the site and then just remove one image.

You know OBF, that your “funny” little quips like this last one, are duly noted by the attentive reader for what they are – a dodge from committing to a rational explanation of the core ingredient of your ‘theory’. That being what this “smokescreen” was, and how it kept what was “really going on” from the eyes of the people and cameras of lower Manhattan on 9/11.

This is an essential element of Shacks theory, because you cannot have what is really going on in plain view to anyone with a camera who might get pics of something other than the “grand illusion” by the media that he and you are positing here.

Do you understand the difficult corner you have painted yourself into here?

Well it is obvious that you do from your silence on this matter. You realize, and I posit have always realized that this whole ‘video fakery’ gambit is an elaborate hoax meant to erase the visual evidence of the WTC 9/11 event. This is why I charge that the video fakery scam is a part of the ongoing PSYOP of 9/11.

If one compares the techniques of one A Wright to yours the similarities are obvious.
You ignore any critique you have no valid answer for, just as Wright does. You then wait in the wings for some amount of time, and then return with your same bullshit rap as if no one has ever challenged you.

Just how long do you think this hide and seek game is going to work for you?

Hello All: I was initially hot to buy and read the book in question until I read more than a few reviews on Amazon that attacked the book on several different levels. Apparently, Bain believes in aspects of the 9/11 narrative such as Arab hijackers crashing planes into buildings and that Bin Laden was alive until his “death” in 2011. My understanding from other sources claimed he died in December, 2001 from renal failure. He also had Marfin syndrome which often shortens a person’s life.

People operate from heuristics which continue their belief systems. It has taken a lot of scienitic inquiry and knowledge for people to move from “Our government couldn’t do such a wicked deed” to something the government is telling me doesn’t add up. Now, we are told these people behind the scenes are occultists which may continue to blur the truth that more people are willing to accept which is our government is corrupt. We can accept this but now you are telling me it is more than this? It’s pychological overload for most people.

The last book on 9/11 I want to read is where the real culprits confess to the crimes, are arrested and fully convicted of their crimes. Then I want the leading governments of this world to announce in chorus that this bogus war on terror is over for good.

“Apparently, Bain believes in aspects of the 9/11 narrative such as Arab hijackers crashing planes into buildings and that Bin Laden was alive until his “death” in 2011.”~Dog Lover

I wasn’t aware of this aspect of the book in question. That is pretty silly business there.
I have heard enough other things about the book and it’s author to let it pass.

I have little doubt of the weird occult workings of some of these upper management systems. Their beliefs in numerology and symbolism for guidance. With the caveat that it is THEIR belief no mine.

But I have been concerned about Bain’s previous portfolio and association with the neocon elements that were responsible for the original blueprint for 9/11. That remains my major concern about taking the book seriously.

Now that Phoenix is still busily chugging away out there in the desert, I am most curious to see if Bain will even be willing to go on with his promised interview with Mr McKee. Bain may have been in this for the short-run a very short run…{???}

Hello HR1: If you go to Amazon.com you can read all the reviews on Bain’s book and a few reviewers give quite cogent feedback about what they read in the book. I’m gathering that my assertion is based on their reading of the book regarding Bain’s holding of the official government story in these aspects of 9/11.

I also read from one of the reviews of Bain holding the belief regarding what the President of Iran is to have allegedly said that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map. So yes, I also have problems with Bain’s work and his functioning at the Weekly Standard, I believe. He is certainly no William Cooper.

A friend was going to buy this book too but passed and is going to read “Planes Without Passengers” by Hartwell. I’m looking to get the book soon as well.

You can now find us at truthandshadows.com!

To reach this site, you can now simply go to truthandshadows.com (no need to type in "wordpress") and you be redirected here. This will save people all over the world tens of seconds over their lifetimes!

Email Subscription

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Plato on shadows

Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood let alone believed by the masses. – Plato

Choosing dictatorship

A society whose citizens refuse to see and investigate the facts, who refuse to believe that their government and their media will routinely lie to them and fabricate a reality that is contrary to verifiable facts, is a society that chooses and deserves the police state dictatorship it is going to get. – Ian Williams Goddard

The stages of truth

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
– Arthur Schoepenhauer

Origin of the term ‘False Flag’

The term originated in the days of naval warfare. Ships would hoist the flag of their enemy, enabling them to approach closer to enemy ships than otherwise they could. They then could open fire with the advantage of surprise. The combination of secrecy and deception is a hallmark of all false flag operations.
The definitional issues of false flag go well beyond the two components mentioned above and will be tackled in Part 3. The false flag phenomenon encompasses false flag events, pseudo events, front organizations and players (agents). In the events category the not-always-reliable Wikipedia provides a good definition:
False flag operations are covert operations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_operation) conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations […] designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. […] False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy's strategy of tension (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_of_ tension).
Outcomes are one criterion for classifying false flag events, pseudo events, fronts and agents. The strategy of tension, mentioned in the Wikipedia definition, includes all four forms. Ironically a pretty good explanation of the outcomes criterion can be found on an anti-Truther site, Skeptoid:*
If one were to work solely from [“conspiracy hotbeds”] it would be easy to get the impression that our recent history is jammed with prefabricated incidents designed to enable our government to grab more power, take away the rights of the common people and/or line their already fattened pockets.
You got it right there, Skeptoid.
• http://skeptoid.com/blog/2013/01/21/false-flag-attacks-myth-and-reality/
.– Barrie Zwicker

Exposing the lies

The World-Wide 9/11 Truth movement is currently the largest investigative journalism project on the planet. – Barrie Zwicker

On conspiracy theories

Every time someone makes fun of the idea of “conspiracy theories” they are exhibiting a conditioned response – like salivating when they hear a bell or believing a TV news program. – Craig McKee

Reach Craig by email

It took long enough, but Truth and Shadows now has its own email for those of you wanting to send messages to me that aren't intended for the comments section. To reach me, email truthandshadows@yahoo.com.
Some of you already have been using my personal email to reach me with blog related messages or questions, and you can certainly continue to do that if you wish. - Craig McKee